White House Downplays Scope Of Appointee's Education Role

Washington--Roger B. Porter, President Bush's domestic-policy
adviser, confirmed last week that John E. Chubb had been tapped for an
education-related White House post but downplayed the job's
significance.

The post the White House sought to fill, Mr. Porter said, was a
previously existing position on his staff that involved routine
"liaison" duties with the departments of Transportation, Housing and
Urban Development, and Education. It was not a new position, he said,
and it would not be focused exclusively on education.

But sources with knowledge of the hiring process affirmed last week
that Mr. Porter had sought an education expert to play an advisory role
solely on education.

Mr. Chubb, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, had told
Education Week that he had accepted a new and "unprecedented" position
that would involve advising the President on education issues. (See
Education Week, April 12, 1989.)

He said he was to start May 15, provided that the White House was
satisfied with the result of background investigations and top-level
officials gave final approval.

Mr. Chubb, who declined further comment last week, had said he would
use the position to promote parental choice and school restructuring,
ideas the political scientist has espoused in publications and
interviews over the past few years.

"The key for me and the reason I'm taking [the job] is that I think
the President is interested in improving the sorry state of our
schools," he said.

Mr. Chubb also said in the initial interview that any White House
adviser would be likely to clash with the executive agency overseeing
the same area and that part of his job would be to "provide a
counterpoint to the [Education] department."

"Any way we can improve communications between our offices is a good
thing," Secretary of Education Lauro F. Cavazos said April 9, before
Mr. Chubb's remarks were published. "I don't see it as an
encroachment."

Cavazos Said Sole 'Adviser'

But the Secretary's aides said last week that Mr. Chubb's comments
about conflict with the department had angered the Secretary.

Bill R. Phillips, Mr. Cavazos' chief of staff, said Mr. Chubb had
"an overinflated ego" and was "out of touch with reality."

On April 5, Mr. Porter responded "yes" when asked by a reporter
whether it was true that he "had been interviewing people to be a
Presidential education adviser."

"We're closing in on someone," Mr. Porter said. "We've just about
got a deal cut."

But in an interview last week, Mr. Porter said that Mr. Chubb was
either misquoted or mistaken about the job he was offered.

"There isn't any education adviser position," Mr. Porter said.

He said Mr. Chubb had been selected to replace a White House aide,
Kate Moore, who has been nominated to be assistant secretary for budget
in the Department of Transportation.

The job of "associate director of domestic policy" involves acting
as a "liaison" with the departments of Education, Transportation, and
Housing and Urban Development, Mr. Porter said. He said he never
intended to hire anyone solely to give advice on education, adding that
''we have many advisers in many areas."

He stressed that he did not intend to hire an aide who would challenge
the authority of Secretary Cavazos.

"I have a very good working relationship with the Department of
Education. I have a very good working relationship with Secretary
Cavazos," Mr. Porter said. "We worked very closely together on the set
of education measures the President has submitted to the Congress."

Conflicting Interpretations

One prominent educator, who was said by others to have compiled a
list of names in the field to be considered for the post, said he also
understood it that way.

"I believe it is the case that they were looking for somebody who
could bring a flair for education to fill the job," said Chester E.
Finn Jr., former assistant secretary of education, but "I never heard
it depicted as an education adviser's job."

However, several others, including those interviewed, disagreed.
They said they were never told that the job would involve any duties
unrelated to education.

The job was characterized as "advising the White House on education
issues," a source said, adding that the interview included discussion
that "for the first time, we are creating a focused position on
education in the White House."

The source noted, however, that the job description was not firm,
and speculated that Mr. Chubb might have spoken to Education Week
partly to "smoke out" the White House's level of commitment to an
advisory post.

Another source said the position was meant to be "a very serious
education job" focused "exclusively" on education. The source's
"impression" was also that it was to be a new position, at least in
terms of its focus.

White House officials wanted an "absolute luminary" to be the
staff's "education heavy," whose duties would include speaking to
interest groups and the press, and assisting in the formulation of
policy, the source said.

The sources noted that those interviewed for the job were academics
or professionals whose expertise is in education. Ms. Moore, the aide
Mr. Porter said Mr. Chubb would replace, has a different
background.

Ms. Moore worked on President Bush's campaign staff and on the
transition team, and was director of the budget office at the National
Enel10ldowment for the Arts from 1981 through 1988.

'Think Education Thoughts'

Observers familiar with the workings of the White House agreed that
the decision to add an education expert to the staff in some capacity
probably signaled increased interest in the topic.

"I think it's a good idea, although I suspect that if I were in
Secretary Cavazos' shoes, I would not like it as much," said Gary L.
Bauer, who said he had heard about the pending creation of an advisory
post.

"It means the department will not have a blank check on education
ideas," as "there will be someone at the White House whose job is to
think education thoughts," said Mr. Bauer, who served as undersecretary
of education and domestic-poli4cy adviser in the Reagan
Administration.

"I suspect that the President is serious about the idea of becoming
an education President and this is something of a signal that he thinks
he needs more troops than he has now," Mr. Bauer said.

"The notion of someone with education in his portfolio is customary,
not unprecedented," said Mr. Finn, who also served on the White House
staff during the Nixon Administration.

"The historical eccentricity here is that, in the last four years of
the Reagan Administration, there was very weak White House control over
domestic policy," he said.

But "the mere fact of the person in that job being an education
specialist, rather than a standard Kennedy School generalist," Mr. Finn
said, referring to graduates of the Kennedy School of Government at
Harvard University, "might mean that we'll see more education activity
coming out of the White House."

"It's a symbol of a greater interest in education at a time when
[President Bush] knows his budget resources are small and he knows he
can't launch any further federal initiatives," said Stuart Eizenstat,
who was domestic-policy adviser in the Carter Administration. "It's a
way of demonstrating concern by bringing it closer to the Oval
Office.''

Mr. Eizenstat said an education adviser should be part of the
domestic-policy staff, rather than in "a free-standing position." Such
a person would be less effective without "institutional moorings," and
could create conflict, he said.

"I think it's an admirable instinct," Mr. Eizenstat added, "but it
must be organized in a careful way so as not to undercut either the
Secretary of Education or the domestic-policy adviser."

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.